The Impact of Systemic Factors on Research-Practice Partnerships: Insights from Israel

• In Event: Global Contexts for Research-Practice Partnerships: They Come in All Shapes and Sizes

Abstract

Objectives
Research-practice partnerships (RPPs), initially conceptualized in the United States (Coburn, Penuel, & Geil, 2013), have expanded worldwide, yet scholarship remains predominantly U.S.-centric, and fails to capture diverse contexts. This paper examines an Israeli RPP to show how systemic forces shape institutional arrangements, power distribution, and decision-making. We extend understanding of RPPs beyond the U.S framework and advocate a broader adaptable conceptualization of RPPs.
Perspectives
Designed to leverage research for U.S district-level improvement, RPPs originally emphasized district engagement (Coburn et al., 2013). Farrell et al. (2021) distilled five principles: long-term engagement; a focus on applied improvement; research integration; diverse stakeholders' interaction; and inclusive participation. As RPPs spread, contexts become decisive. Studies from Sweden, France, and Germany (Sjölund, 2024; Pasco, 2024; Fischer-Schoeneborn & Ehmke, 2024) show national structures shaping partnership formation. Our study illustrates how the Israeli education system shapes RPPs.
Methods
We examined one RPP linking two higher-education institutions with 21 schools. We analyzed key RPP artifacts, including planning material, official RPP proposal, partners and stakeholders’ email exchanges, 12 team meeting notes, 24 leadership meetings transcripts, financial reports, and two summary presentations. We followed Denner et al., (2019) and Penuel et al., (2013), who analyzed written documentation and events to investigate RPPs.
Using qualitative content analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), we analyzed how four systemic factors—educational structure, data culture, funding streams, and policy turbulence—shaped partnership arrangements, power, and decisions.
Central Findings and Significance
Structure of the education system.
Israel’s highly centralized system complicates district-level partnerships; collaboration with individual schools becomes the primary avenue for local improvement, yet centralization encourages conformity. The principals who chose to participate in the RPP were atypical in the Israeli landscape. They saw themselves as accountable for and capable of providing their students with the best educational opportunities and understood the potential of school research in making informed, autonomous decisions.
Data culture.
Systematic data collection and analysis are not institutionalised. Teachers and principals receive little training in research or data use, and data-informed decision-making is not embedded in school culture. In the RPP, all teachers who participated in the research team were selected by the principal; most were also part of the school’s leadership team.
Funding.
Funding opportunities for school-based research are scarce. Local authorities and third-sector organizations seldom contribute; districts have limited fiscal autonomy; and schools receive compensation or time allocations for research. Principals secured financial and personnel resources to take part in the RPP. Participating schools had relatively more resources and greater flexibility in resource allocation.
Policy turbulence.
Frequent shifts in national priorities create instability, discouraging educational partners from long-term commitments. In light of Israel’s policy turbulence and funding situation, the RPP was originally confined to one-year. Some schools participate three consecutive years.
The presentation will show how a country's context shapes RPPs. The study underscores the importance of recognizing contextual forces and their influence on shaping RPPs. We conclude by calling for a more flexible, internationally attuned conception of RPPs to promote culturally and ecologically responsive approaches to RPPs.

Authors

• Linor Lea Hadar, University of Haifa

• Hadar Baharav, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev